Ever wondered:
This is also for all the users that asked for a video. It is almost a video 
Edit: Since Apr 26th 2025 there is also a Why? What? How? youtube video.
Edit2: Since May 15th 2025 there is also a
Use the ArduPilot Methodic Configurator software for the first time youtube video.
In general it is a nice tool, but IMO a little overloaded with input fields. Especially on vehicle components. Personally I would remove all fields that are not tuning relevant - like URLs, and make all fields where You need to provide info about hardware replace with dropdown list of supported peripherals.
For instance - Flight controller, there is limited well defined list of supported FC. For ECS - what is the difference which manufacturer or what it the web page - isnāt enough to provide which firmware it runs, how You want it to talk with FC (bdshot, pwm etc), perhaps max current ratings. What is the difference for tuning if that is ESC manufactured by T-Motor, or speedybee when both have BLHeli32?
Also filling that I always had this doubt - what if I misspell something here? Is there any impact for tuning?
Perhaps it would be nice to have some basic/expert mode where basic mode follows just most commonly used hardware, and with expert mode You can setup whatever You like?
But that is just me, and my impression.
Other that that - great tool.
Thanks for the feedback, are you using the latest version?
Flight controller, there is limited well defined list of supported FC
No need for that. that value is auto-filled if you have a FC connected. And we do know what processor it has for all the 246 supported FC boards.
what is the difference which manufacturer or what it the web page
For people trying to support you there is a difference. they need to know where you got it from. Many sources are bad.
We can also use that information to do parameter changes depending on which manufacturer.
Is it that much work to do? You only need to do it once. Do it once, and do it correctly.
Also filling that I always had this doubt - what if I misspell something here? Is there any impact for tuning?
Yes, because some parameter decisions depend on it. Do not misspell your prop size or your battery voltage. Another example is:
if Manufacturer == "T-Motor" and Model == "Fame" then set MOT_PWM_MIN,1100
if Manufacturer == "T-Motor" and Model == "Fame" then set MOT_PWM_MAX,1940
Where to draw the line? Beginners will always complain that a feature is missing, or complain that is too complicated.
I will address some of your points in a later release, I will declare some ācomponent editorā fields optional. But there are no optional fields in the āparameter editorā
Lookikng on it right now. I am assembling new drone and looking on it now. Tried also some older versions.
But it is needed for almost everything else, as fields seems to be filled with wrong data from template even if I set āUse parameter values from connected FC, not from template filesā, and basically I need to correct almost everything next to filling it in.
I had in mind no numerical fiels. Like manufacturer, or missing URL or something, or wrong some firmware version, etc. And would I need to redo this each time I update some components firmware just to make this tool happy and correct? Does that affect tuning procedure? (just an example).
if Manufacturer == "T-Motor" and Model == "Fame" then set MOT_PWM_MIN,1100
if Manufacturer == "T-Motor" and Model == "Fame" then set MOT_PWM_MAX,1940
Sooā¦ if I put there as manufacturer āTMotorā it will not work at all? You see there is no validation at all here, as this is almost impossible to validate properly in current shape. Perhaps sime kind of āhintā would be enough.
That is usually neverending story, but I think can be adjusted āon the goā - if some feature is considered should be in basic, or should not it can be adjusted when releasing new versions. This will always be suboptimal in terms of number of happy users.
Just to be clear - it is not to criticize, this is very useful tool 
, butā¦
I will summarize that this way:
I am embedded developer, and when I develop some app that has GUI and show it to my friend/boss feedback is almost every time similar to that:
boss: You did the UI design, didnāt You?
me: Does it show?
boss: Yesā¦ embedded dev style UX 
The automatically filed fields are grayed out and you can not edit them
FC is one of them, it will not be filled from template. I think you have a very old version. Or you found a bug!
That was an over simplification. I had no clue I was talking to a fellow programmer.
It does not use == is uses fuzzy matches and tolower() and stuff
The validation is there in numerical fields. Test it out, they will become red and warn you.
I just donwloaded release from yesterday.
After pressing button to create vehicle configā¦ (ony one that creates new config)
This seems to be the only was to create initial config, or am I missing something?
What FC do you have?
It still falls back to template values if it has no way to determine the correct value automatically.
FC is detected correctly, bu all other fields are not.
And, as I set not to use template, I would expect to have that empty if not detected from current FC setup, so I do not need to fix/correct everything on the list.
Yes, it is better to have some values pre-filled than to have a empty list, with no clue of what stuff to fill in.
That was a complain from other users. If I clean them to make you happy, I will make them sad.
I will improve the documentation, thanks for the feedback!
I too prefer unfilled fields, maybe make an empty preset.
Sure, that I can understand. Howeverā¦
Could You explain what exactly this check does? I am setting this one on purpose to avoid using template, but template is used anyway.
The templates contain many things, but for simplicity sake letās look at these three:
That checkbox controls the third set. So:
My plan is to create a second checkbox that controls information source of the first point
@Adam_Borowski I implemented more template options in the latest development build. Component blanking is now possible. Reason changed blanking will come soon.
I found the āsave issueā it is caused by the prop model on the Chimera 7 and FETtec 5 templates. Starting in version 1.1.2 the prop model must not be a number and those two templates use numbers, hence the regression you are experiencing. I am working on improving that as well.
! noticed one thing about this tool. It ālikesā to move forward. Even at the beginning step for temperature compensationā¦ I just write params, and then immediatelly it is asking me if I want to provide bin for the results.
IMO it would be much ānicerā to have step that just displays action that You need to do - like "put FC to freezer, and run me again when it is cold. Also interrupting is justā¦ not very clean - I am trying to close it and despite that it is still trying to progress a little instead just close itself.
IMO just to have additional āpauseā steps when user action is required - like putting FC to freezer, do some test flight etc would be very nic to have feature and I think it would greatly benefit UX aspect of the tool.
Good point. I will see what I can do about that.
Why I am hesitant to use the ArduPilot methodic configurator .
When I built my quadcopter, I had no idea that the AMC existed. I merely followed the steps I had successfully completed in past builds. But when I encountered problems with my latest project, I was chastised for not using this tool. So, I downloaded the configurator and tried using it even though I was unable to find any documentation that would guide me through the process. I was immediately turned off as it seemed to be a tool aimed at someone who was just getting started for the first time ā not my use case. There were many confusing aspects to the tool.
Right off the bat, when launching the configurator, Iām presented with a choice: Connect to my f.c. or skip the FC connection and edit .param files on disk. If I connect to my Pixhawk, what state should it be in? Should I have just loaded the firmware and not attempt any of the calibration steps? Or should I do the calibrations and then connect to the configurator? And what about selecting the No connection option? Under what circumstances would this be recommended? And what .param file(s) does it use? I Should know which path to take before I commit to either one. I should have to guess which way to go.
I have a choice to create a new configuration or use an existing one. If I create one, Iām presented with this:
Step #3 has an ominous tone ā collect the required information. Okay, I hope I know what the tool regards as required information.
Right off, for each component, Iām supposed to enter the manufacturer, Model, URL, Version, etc. For the flight controller, Iām using a Holybro Pixhawk 6C. My guesses are:
Manufacturer: Holybro
Model: Pixhawk
URL: Do I enter the url to the Holybro website or drill down to the page that contains info regarding the 6C flight controller?
Version: 6C
This leads me to wonder what items above are necessary for the tool to properly configure my aircraft and what is simply documentation, like Notes? There should be some sort of prompt or indication to guide the user as to what fields are required for configuring the aircraft.
For the frame, I have a question. The basic frame is a Tarot 650 Sport, but I modified it. I added a third center plate because I chose to mount the ESCs within the body as opposed to hanging them below each motor. Also, I had to lengthen the arms a tad in order to accommodate the 17ā Tarot propellers I chose to use in conjunction with my MN5008 400KV T-Motors. Does the configurator need to know these things? I guess not as it only seems to be concerned about aircraft weight. What is the difference between TOW min and TOW max? Is the min value without the lipo pack and max with the lipo attached?
What is an RC Controller? The configurator has entries for RC Receiver and RC Transmitter. Do I just blank out the fields associated with RC Controller if I donāt have one?
Bottom line, there should be some sort of documentation that a first time user like me can refer to prior to actually running the tool, so I know what to expect.
Currently, I have gone through calibrations in the order recommended by others who have been successful and provided steps to follow. I also tried using the AMC but a test flight resulted in uncontrolled wobbling about the yaw axis and a crash. Iām loathe to ask for help because all I get is being chastised for not using your tool. I guess my only option is to seek advice from other sources. At any rate, I thought Iādā share with you my experience.
Thanks for taking the time to write that down.
That is a lot of questions. Letās go at it one by one:
It does not matter. On the main website frontpage and on section 2 to the tunning guide we explain what FW to use:
Use Mission Planner to flash the latest stable ArduCopter, ArduPlane, ArduRover, ArduSub or ArduBlimp firmware for your flight controller.
You do not have param files so it is obvious that connecting an FC is the only option you have until you do create .param files using the tool.
You need to enter that data for:
So there is no right or wrong for that particular Manufacturer, Model, URL and version. I unterstand your confusion and will try to make it more explicit that it is so.
When in doubt, fill the information. Your future-self will tank you. But yes, I will try to make it more explicit.
Would be nice if you add that to the notes field, yes. But it is not necessary.
TOW min is the minimum weight that the vehicle has at takeoff including batteries (no cargo).
TOW max is the maximum weight that the vehicle has at takeoff including batteries (with max cargo).
If you do not carry cargo on your vehicle then both weights match.
The thing with the RC sticks on it. Sometimes it integrates the RC transmitter inside it.
RC receiver is the one on the vehicle. Didnāt you say that you are an experienced RC hobbyist and got turned off as it seemed to be a tool aimed at someone who was just getting started for the first time?
Yes.
The documentation is there, but you do need to read it. Links are posted on top of this post
Without a .zip file with the contents of the vehicle directory created by the AMC and a .bin file of that particular flight, I can not help you.
Please do ask more questions and provide more feedback.
PS: I edited the tittle of your post to better reflect reality.
I looked though ArduPilot_Methodic_Configurator.pdf plus the use cases document and it isnāt clear if this is suitable for fixed wing applications or not. Although it is named ardupilot methodic configurator, I only see references to copters. Cheers,
@timtuxworth wanted to add a ArduPlane Template a while ago. Since then there has been no interrest from ArduPlane developers to add that. The AMC source code supports ArduPlane already, but without a template, it can not do it yet, sorry.
